nationfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:First Chamber
__NEWSECTIONLINK__ In Lovia, Congress is the national legislative body and the most powerful branch of government. The First Chamber is one of the two chambers of Congress, in which the Members of the Congress propose bills and debate them. The Second Chamber is where they are eventually voted. Despite the two-chamber system, Lovia does not have a bicameral parliament: there is only one group of MOTCs that both debates and votes the proposals. For the current composition of Congress, see this. As prescribed by Article 6 of the Constitution, all Lovian citizens "may write and propose motions to the Federal Law", that "are presented to the Members of the Congress in the First Chamber." The MOTCs' duty is to "read the motion and form a personal opinion about it. In order to obtain the support of a majority of Members of the Congress, changes may be proposed in the First Chamber." If a majority is likely to be found, the proposer will move the bill to the Second Chamber for a vote. The First Chamber is not a popular assembly where all citizens can express their personal interests. Polling the population ought to happen outside of Congress. __TOC__ Proposal for the formation of the Ilava II Government I propose the formation of a new government for 2013, comments are welcome and this is completely open to change. Let us get this instated for inauguration day: *Prime Minister **Oos Wes Ilava (OWTB) *Ministry of Agriculture **... (-Sunkist-) *Ministry of Commerce **... (Happy65) *Ministry of Culture **... (OWTB) *Ministry of Defense **Lukas Hoffmann (Kunarian) *Ministry of Education **... (Kunarian) *Ministry of Energy and Resources **... (-Sunkist-) *Ministry of Environment **... (77topaz) *Ministry of Finance **... (TimeMaster) *Ministry of Foreign Affairs **... (horton11) *Ministry of Health **... (Quarantine Zone) *Ministry of Justice **... (Happy65) *Ministry of Labour **... (Crystalbeastdeck09) *Ministry of Tourism and Sport **... (77topaz) *Ministry of Transportation **... (Wabba The I) *Speaker of the Congress **... (TimeMaster) Let the debate begin. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 17:26, January 30, 2013 (UTC) Discuss I propose two changes: please also include the ministry of Family, Youth and Elderly. And take me off of either Culture or Education. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 17:28, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :I feel that the Ministry of the Family, Youth and Elderly needs to be more defined, what would their aims be as a ministry? I'll replace you in education, I feel that you are a great developer of both Oceana's and Lovia's culture. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 17:31, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::Okay :) I don't feel the name is undefined. It should concentrate on facilities for the youth and the elderly (like rest homes, which we have a shortage of), and activities for youth. And it should be there to create a support for families in trouble (like divorce), and normal families. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 17:56, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::For the Dutchies, it should resemble http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmaminister_voor_Jeugd_en_Gezin. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 17:57, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::I feel that homes for the elderly as well as support for families should come under the Ministry of Health, they need to provide for the people on that account and on the matters of youth, the Ministry of Education should take up that front (which now you've raised that I will ensure that I do take that on as a primary objective). I feel that while those matters are important they fall under the jurisdiction of other ministries too much. However if you feel that despite this there is still a strong reason for inserting it as a ministry then I'm open to ideas. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 18:05, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::::I don't feel youth activities should fall under the Ministery of Health.. Nor should they fall under the Ministery of Education, as they are not falling under educational goals. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 18:09, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::::You could argue that they do fall under the Ministry of Education, activities designed for the youth to ensure that they are prepared for the world easily fall under the Ministry of Education, other activities further off from that I don't know about. But I can see your point, a Ministry to deal with youth matters may be a good idea. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 18:31, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::Including the Noble Family? Happy65 Talk CNP ''' ' 17:58, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::Including the Noble Family :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 18:04, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :This is great. I support this. ' Happy65 ' ' Talk CNP ' ' 17:54, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::I like the set up. I support the Ministry of Family, Youth, and Elderly. --Quarantine Zone (talk) 20:53, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::I'm mixed....most i like, some i don't. Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:01, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::Sorry, but why do someone have 2 and other's none. It's not just becuse many good people didn't get a position. Granero (talk) 22:25, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::::These are the only people who showed interest in being in a Ministry. @Marcus: I'm not fully satisfied either with certain aspects but I think this is the one that people can most agree with across the board, you must understand we're working with a highly divided Congress and we must all co-operate to move forwards together. Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 22:37, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::::I put an interest to be in a ministry but you did not add me. And why is sunkist with more places then Crystalbeastdeck09 and Horton11, they have more votes. And Pikapi and Semyon too have more votes, and they didn't even get one. Granero (talk) 23:06, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::::And in the page of Forum:Government, you didn't select education. Realy I see only that right politicians have two positions but center didn't get many and the left none. Granero (talk) 23:09, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::::@your first point: Did you? well then which Ministries would you like to be in then? And the reason Sunkist is in more places is because he chose two ministries where basically no one else signed up. Same thing with Marcus and Horton but the reverse, they chose places with a lot of conflict but I tried to chose the area that they would take the greatest interest in and benefit Lovia most from, such as Marcus being the Minister of Labour (interactions with Trade Unions will be his forte and there are other points I can muster too). I have full confidence that they will fulfil their roles well. And by the way the reason Pikapi and Semyon didn't get places is because for the former, he isn't around and showed no interest in any ministry we need people who are active for ministers not just putting them there to be tokens, and for the latter, he only showed interest in Speaker of the Congress but isn't around that much at the moment and the speaker is vital for getting laws through so I was forced to choose the more active Timemaster. Also on your final point, votes will not dictate the places you get in government that would be ignorant and cause all kinds of problems, what gets people places is being active, showing an interest and really putting the effort into what you do, so that is why votes will not dictate places awarded in government. Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 23:17, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::::@your second point: No I didn't but if you've read the conversation you would understand why my name is there, and if you've read what Time has written you will realise why I will most likely be changing it to him. And you're being completely silly there. Tell me is Sunkist a rightist? is Oos, the well known centrist, a rightist? Is Topaz, the leader of the greens, a rightist? and is Timemaster a rightist? what you say about right, center and left is complete nonsense. This government has only 5 (soon to be 4) offices held by those who identify as rightists. You seem to simply be trying to stir up trouble due to a simple mishap over you having a place in government. Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 23:22, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::::::I selected education and defense and health. But really I prefer to be in health or education, I have more knowledges in the two. Granero (talk) 23:35, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::::::I selected only defence so unfortunately I would say that I'm keeping that one. However on education, Time may give it to you but I don't know about Healthcare, you weren't active last year very much while holding that position, maybe it doesn't capture your imagination like you think. Unless you feel that this will change? Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 23:40, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::::::I really have lot's in ideas in health and education now, it's areas that I want to make much better . Granero (talk) 23:49, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::::::::I don't know your positions on health and education, could you define them? Also on a last note, are you sure there are no other Ministries you feel you take an interest in? Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 23:52, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::::::::You've put me in an awkward position. QZ is more active than you and Time has a full plan set out for education. I need to sleep now but I must say that this is rather uncomfortable. I hope that you can work something out with Time and QZ while I'm gone, if not I'll get back to work. Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 23:56, January 30, 2013 (UTC) I'd really like to be Minister of Education this term. I made a plan at User:TimeMaster/Education. I also support the Ministry of Family, Youth, and Elderly, but it's a bit wordy. Maybe we could find a two-word name? In addition, changing Agriculture to Food and Agriculture (and Fisheries?) would be nice, and Education to Education and Research. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:46, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :I will most certainly give you the position, however I don't know if it is fair for you to have three positions. If Granero would accept it, would you give him the position as the Minister of Finance? or if not we can simply swap my education position for your financial position and then work out a different place for Granero. Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 23:25, January 30, 2013 (UTC) ::My only problem is the appointment of QZ to health, beacuse of his views on Universal health care and things within that department. Why doesn't this happen Kunarian swap education with TM for finance, and then Granero take Defense. Kunarian: Finance, TM: Education, Granero: Defense. Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:55, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::I will not give up the position of Defence it is the only one that I signed up to and I'm part way through a reform. Also remember that QZ supports universal healthcare, he is just more conservative in it's application than most, however it's application is decided by Congress, the Ministry carries out the application. Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 23:59, January 30, 2013 (UTC) :::Lemme see if I can formulate a plan... Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:02, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :::Pleas, I would like to do then health, because I have a good plan for that. Granero (talk) 00:04, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :::My version, Or prefered version would have Kunarian and TM's positions of Education and Finance switched, and then Granero put into health. Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:07, January 31, 2013 (UTC) I'd be okay with not having Finance, but I did make Department of Finance/Budget. I'd rather have both. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 00:46, January 31, 2013 (UTC) i would like to have ministry of health, or maybe ministry of labour. just one is good for me. Daembrales (talk) 01:42, January 31, 2013 (UTC) We've actually had these debates and conversations already. (a bit late for that) and they're usually reserved for senior members and the party leaders and such. Marcus/Michael Villanova 02:02, January 31, 2013 (UTC) I signed up for defense and health, but Kunarian only wanted defense and he's more active and he's been around longer, so he definitely gets that one. As far as health care goes, I want a Bismarck model with an extra cheap government run option for non-necessities that would cost a small extra tax. It would be like a government run, cheap, private style option. --Quarantine Zone (talk) 02:14, January 31, 2013 (UTC) Isn't the PM position allocated through a referendum? 77topaz (talk) 03:49, January 31, 2013 (UTC) Yes. I'll have to set one up. ' Happy65 ' ' Talk CNP ' ' 07:39, January 31, 2013 (UTC) :Actually, it's not. It's treated like any other minister. Though it wouldn't be bad to hold a poll to see the preference. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 12:01, January 31, 2013 (UTC) Let me allow to say one thing. I'd prefer that the Minsitry of Education goes to someone who is pro special and religious education, for obvious reasons. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 09:16, January 31, 2013 (UTC) I'm neutral, is that good enough? :P —TimeMaster (talk • ) 12:00, January 31, 2013 (UTC) I agree with Oos on this, but neutral is better than against them... --Quarantine Zone (talk) 21:40, January 31, 2013 (UTC) Referendum for PM Referendum is needed. ' Happy65 ' ' Talk CNP ' ' 07:39, January 31, 2013 (UTC) TimeMaster (18) *4 votes. 77topaz (talk) 08:11, January 31, 2013 (UTC) *8 votes. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 12:01, January 31, 2013 (UTC) *4 votes. Vivaporius says: "I don't need a slogan!" 14:48, January 31, 2013 (UTC) *2 votes. Granero (talk) 04:40, February 1, 2013 (UTC) Ooswesthoesbes (45) *9 votes. ' Happy65 ' ' Talk CNP ' ' 07:39, January 31, 2013 (UTC) *14 votes. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 09:16, January 31, 2013 (UTC) *7 votes Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 10:39, January 31, 2013 (UTC) *6 votes Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:59, January 31, 2013 (UTC) *5 votes -Sunkist- (talk) 05:25, February 1, 2013 (UTC) *4 votes Wabba The I (talk) 09:45, February 2, 2013 (UTC) *... Joshua Katz (Semyon) (8) *5 votes. --Semyon 20:01, February 1, 2013 (UTC) *3 votes. --Quarantine Zone (talk) 21:47, February 1, 2013 (UTC) Discussion I hope for the CNP-CCLP-LP coalition to occur and the members to take it seriously and have a government PM and leadership. I throw my support behind Oos only in hopes of this. Marcus/Michael Villanova 22:59, January 31, 2013 (UTC) CNP-CCPL-LP coalition? What do those parties have in common? --Quarantine Zone (talk) 03:23, February 1, 2013 (UTC) Not that much, I would say. :P 77topaz (talk) 06:24, February 1, 2013 (UTC) Alot actually. CCPL-CNP have great friendships and CCPL work with Labour also very well. It is a nice idea. ' Happy65 ' ' Talk CNP ' ' 08:16, February 1, 2013 (UTC) CNP's economic views are highly divergent from Labour's, and CCPL's social/ethical views are highly divergent from Labour's. :P 77topaz (talk) 08:46, February 1, 2013 (UTC) We have very similar views on devolution though and aim to focus on installing essential laws that have been ignored over the past years. We're united in wanting to truly flesh out Lovias law system and bringing politics closer to the people. Hoffmann Kunarian'TALK' 09:12, February 1, 2013 (UTC) CNP and CCPl are close, but LP is different. I'd be up for the Confederate coalition though. --Quarantine Zone (talk) 15:13, February 1, 2013 (UTC) Yeah but too be honest, we don't even have essential laws like taxation, regulation or a budget. And too be honest a CCPL-CNP-LP coalition while varying on issues, have some common policies and a lot of common goals. Like when I year "I'm fiscally conservative", well in this country you can't even be fiscally one way or the other because we don't even have laws! I hope we do get that coalition. Marcus/Michael Villanova 21:19, February 1, 2013 (UTC) As it is right now though, Kunarian's plan will probably go through. I still don't think the LP would work well with CCPL and CNP. --Quarantine Zone (talk) 21:50, February 1, 2013 (UTC) Thanks for that delightful insight! Fine Gael and Labour have been in power, in ireland, with each other for a long time, in spite of the difference of Non-republican, center-right and semi-nationalist leftism. It's about forming a bloc with enough people towards a goal. And were not proposing the Communists and the Nazis and the Centrist Liberals to united were talking about center-left,center and center-right. Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:13, February 1, 2013 (UTC) :To be fair, that's a product of Ireland's unique situation. Neither Fianna Fail or Sinn Fein would have been acceptable coalition partners for Fine Gael. Likewise, in the Netherlands, there's a coalition between a centre-right and centre-left party atm - but only because it's the only possible two-party coalition, and because alternatives would include unsavoury people. In Germany, SPD-CDU coalitions are quite common, but each would much rather work with the Greens and the FDP respectively. The point of my waffling is that of course left-right coalitions are possible - but they're more of a last resort. If Lovia was a real country I'd expect a CCPL-CNP coalition in a minority government with support from minor parties such as LMP, rather than this 'omg coalition for the lulz' attitude. :P --Semyon 12:04, February 2, 2013 (UTC) It's an act of "goodness". We could've easily formed a rightist government, but with the inclusion of a leftist party, we will get a centrist government, which is fairer in my eyes. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:28, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Guess I'll archive these to 14 later. :P —TimeMaster (talk • ) 12:57, February 2, 2013 (UTC) You say this is "for the lulz" (okay) but in reality it makes more sense to have those parties together by the numbers and by some common goals. CNP+CCPL+Labour(NPO always included)+OSB = 19+15+13+2 = 49 which is the best shot we have at a bloc or unified parties. Marcus/Michael Villanova 13:59, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Doesn't really make sense to me. The only thing I can see is the confederate agreement, but these parties still don't agree much at all on anything else. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:07, February 2, 2013 (UTC) It just seems like the three parties are for this yet, everyone else is against. Seems like we have our opposition already. We would only need the parties participating in the coalition to agree not every party around it to see if they want it. Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:11, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Well, Kunarian and Oos don't seem to be too enthusiastic about it. Oos is talking about it being an "act of goodness", and Kunarian says that the parties are united by devolution. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:16, February 2, 2013 (UTC) 2013 Congress Welcome again, MOTCs, to the 2013 Congress! First on our agenda is forming a government, followed by an election of the Speaker of the Congress. Afterward, we should aim to create a tax code, pass more laws relating to the economy, and possibly reform the states. It appears that Ilava has won the informal vote to become Prime Minister, so I would like to invite him to propose a government. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:43, February 1, 2013 (UTC) Thank you, Speaker. ' Happy65 ' ' Talk CNP ' ''' 09:22, February 2, 2013 (UTC) He just said the Speaker still had to be elected. :P 77topaz (talk) 09:32, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Well, he was speaker before the elections, and he technically remains speaker until the elections are done. Therefore he is still speaker :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:26, February 2, 2013 (UTC) So, Oos, can you propose your government? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 13:02, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Have we decided on the list? --OuWTBsjrief-mich 13:05, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Maybe not, but you can still propose one. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:06, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Anyway, we need the ministry of Family, Youth and Elderly :P --OuWTBsjrief-mich 14:09, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Okay :P But I'd also like Education --> Education and Research and Agriculture --> Food, Agriculture, (and Fisheries?). —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:12, February 2, 2013 (UTC) Sounds good, including the fishery part :) --OuWTBsjrief-mich 14:18, February 2, 2013 (UTC)